Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 182 of 187 FirstFirst ... 82132172180181182183184 ... LastLast
Results 2,716 to 2,730 of 2796
  1. #2716
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    80,152
    yeah no thanks on Kuzma, he is due for a raise after next year, and is not worth more than $8-10M, but will likely demand much more.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  2. #2717
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    10,635
    T-Wolves trade #1, Culver & Johnson
    T-Wolves get #8, Barrett & Randle

    I really like Randle for you guys. Great relationship with DLO and him and KAT are both Wildcats. IMO great atmosphere to get the best out of Randle. KAT can shoot the 3 and Randle play down low.

    Also Barrett a way better fit then Culver. I really don't like the DLO/Culver tandem, and I like both players.
    "My cow is dead, I don't need your bull"

  3. #2718
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,280
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    T-Wolves trade #1, Culver & Johnson
    T-Wolves get #8, Barrett & Randle

    I really like Randle for you guys. Great relationship with DLO and him and KAT are both Wildcats. IMO great atmosphere to get the best out of Randle. KAT can shoot the 3 and Randle play down low.

    Also Barrett a way better fit then Culver. I really don't like the DLO/Culver tandem, and I like both players.
    Would need an extra 1st that they have stashed.. Culver and Barrett are pretty much a wash and so are Randle and Johnson.... I believe that they have the Mav's pick next year... that would suffice I would think. ...

  4. #2719
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Maple Grove, MN
    Posts
    7,604
    Quote Originally Posted by specialiststeve View Post
    Would need an extra 1st that they have stashed.. Culver and Barrett are pretty much a wash and so are Randle and Johnson.... I believe that they have the Mav's pick next year... that would suffice I would think. ...
    Yep, I second that. I really don't like Barrett either though. I don't know, I just don't like his game at all. He would be a good player about 20 years ago.


    PSD Grammar Lesson #1:

    a) their - stands for "belonging to them"
    b) there - means "over there" as in location
    c) they're - short for "they are"

  5. #2720
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    10,635
    Quote Originally Posted by specialiststeve View Post
    Would need an extra 1st that they have stashed.. Culver and Barrett are pretty much a wash and so are Randle and Johnson.... I believe that they have the Mav's pick next year... that would suffice I would think. ...
    Culver and Barrett a wash? No way, Barrett would probably go #1 in this draft and Culver anywhere from 6 - 10. And I'm a big TT and Culver fan. I just think that if you guys are gonna build around DLO & KAT, Barrett is a much better fit with DLO then Culver.

    Randle and Johnson a wash? Also no way, Randles seasons with the Lakers were all on young tanking teams. No real identity. And his season with NY - do I need to say more, it's the Knicks. That was a waste.

    The only real season Randle played with talent, in N.O. he put up efficient all-star #s.

    Now add to the fact that he already has a good relationship with DLO and I'm sure him and KAT are good since they're both Wildcats, chemistry wouldn't be an issue.
    "My cow is dead, I don't need your bull"

  6. #2721
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    3,280
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    Culver and Barrett a wash? No way, Barrett would probably go #1 in this draft and Culver anywhere from 6 - 10. And I'm a big TT and Culver fan. I just think that if you guys are gonna build around DLO & KAT, Barrett is a much better fit with DLO then Culver.

    Randle and Johnson a wash? Also no way, Randles seasons with the Lakers were all on young tanking teams. No real identity. And his season with NY - do I need to say more, it's the Knicks. That was a waste.

    The only real season Randle played with talent, in N.O. he put up efficient all-star #s.

    Now add to the fact that he already has a good relationship with DLO and I'm sure him and KAT are good since they're both Wildcats, chemistry wouldn't be an issue.
    I like RJ and Randle mind you but .... Randle is terrible from 3 and a liability on Defense... not really where the wolves are looking to go.... RJ is good but not sure he is a sure thing ... neither is Culver but he is decent on D. But in my View not worth moving up that much without another pick.... But who knows

  7. #2722
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    16,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Oefarmy2005 View Post
    I really don't like Kuzma and don't think he is a good fit.
    Iíd love watching the Twolves if they can trade the 1st for Ben Simmons and the 17th for Kuzma. The more shooters you put around Ben the better and I really like a starting 5 of

    PG Beasley
    SG Russell
    SF Simmons
    PF Kuzma
    C Towns

    Simmons would play the Lebron Roll if point forward sourrounded by a team of shooters who are all young and make the playoffs and be very very scary in the playoffs. Kuzma is good, but just impossible to shine bright on a team with Bron and AD.

  8. #2723
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    16,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    yeah no thanks on Kuzma, he is due for a raise after next year, and is not worth more than $8-10M, but will likely demand much more.
    I feel ya, but I donít see any harm in running with him for a year with a pretty solid lineup of

    Beasley
    Russell
    Simmons
    Kuzma
    Towns

    And then making that determination for yourselves if you want to pay him or let him go. To me it seems less risky than drafting with our history. Plus it would just be a fun lineup for MN fans to check out and a breath of fresh air to start the season rolling with a starting five of young talent that actually fits and each player can drop 30. Iíd love to watch it, and I havenít thought that way about a Twolves team in a long time.

  9. #2724
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    16,490
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    Culver and Barrett a wash? No way, Barrett would probably go #1 in this draft and Culver anywhere from 6 - 10. And I'm a big TT and Culver fan. I just think that if you guys are gonna build around DLO & KAT, Barrett is a much better fit with DLO then Culver.

    Randle and Johnson a wash? Also no way, Randles seasons with the Lakers were all on young tanking teams. No real identity. And his season with NY - do I need to say more, it's the Knicks. That was a waste.

    The only real season Randle played with talent, in N.O. he put up efficient all-star #s.

    Now add to the fact that he already has a good relationship with DLO and I'm sure him and KAT are good since they're both Wildcats, chemistry wouldn't be an issue.
    If Iím the Wolves I donít trade the #1 pick away for anything less than Simmons. They can make it work. He and Embiid are a bad fit and Simmons in the Twolves makes a ton of sense.

  10. #2725
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    80,152
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    I feel ya, but I donít see any harm in running with him for a year with a pretty solid lineup of

    Beasley
    Russell
    Simmons
    Kuzma
    Towns

    And then making that determination for yourselves if you want to pay him or let him go. To me it seems less risky than drafting with our history. Plus it would just be a fun lineup for MN fans to check out and a breath of fresh air to start the season rolling with a starting five of young talent that actually fits and each player can drop 30. Iíd love to watch it, and I havenít thought that way about a Twolves team in a long time.
    Kuzma isn't quite the shooter we would like to see alongside Simmons, and even with LeBron/AD he had a pretty awful offensive rating, meaning his scoring was about all he offered, and he is average as hell at it.

    I would be much more apt, if we can trade the #1 for Simmons, to use that 17 pick on a college kid who can shoot and/or defend. We aren't at the luxury line yet, but we also don't want to trade away 4 years of cheap for an established role player who will need more money. Now, if a team will flip us an established shooter who is already under contract, for the #17, then great. But we will likely keep that pick, unless a player pops on draft night that a team behind us wants bad.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  11. #2726
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Maple Grove, MN
    Posts
    7,604
    Well, the Malik Beasley details are out on Star Tribune, and it's not looking good boys. It says that he pointed a rifle at a family that was doing the parade of homes and was looking up their next destination on the curb of his home(they had a 13 year old child in the car). When the police arrived at the residence, they smelled marijuana odor and found 1.5 pounds of weed. Both Malik and his GF are being charged with a felony. I am starting to think we may need to take either Ball or Edwards in this draft after all.

    https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP?ref...Ctwgr%5Eauthor
    Last edited by Oefarmy2005; 10-29-2020 at 12:22 PM.


    PSD Grammar Lesson #1:

    a) their - stands for "belonging to them"
    b) there - means "over there" as in location
    c) they're - short for "they are"

  12. #2727
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    80,152
    yeah, that is unacceptable on all levels. Of course we traded for him.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  13. #2728
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Maple Grove, MN
    Posts
    7,604
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    yeah, that is unacceptable on all levels. Of course we traded for him.
    I am fine with the weed, I would also be fine if he walked out to a strange parked car with a weapon in his hands, but there was no probable cause to point said weapon at the people. And his actions prior, inside the house, clearly indicate the guy is at the very least not very smart and immature. Great job costing yourself millions of dollars bro.
    Last edited by Oefarmy2005; 10-29-2020 at 02:39 PM.


    PSD Grammar Lesson #1:

    a) their - stands for "belonging to them"
    b) there - means "over there" as in location
    c) they're - short for "they are"

  14. #2729
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,951
    Ya that is a very bad look and unacceptable behavior. It also doesn't change much imo of our approach moving forward though. I wouldn't be surprised if we end up trying to keep him just on a cheaper contract now.

    I still try and move the pick for a 3rd stud if at all possible. If not I still prefer to trade back if possible and collect more assets.

  15. #2730
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    80,152
    Quote Originally Posted by Oefarmy2005 View Post
    I am fine with the weed, I would also be fine if he walked out to a strange parked car with a weapon in his hands, but there was no probable cause to point said weapon at the people. And his actions prior, inside the house, clearly indicate the guy is at the very least not very smart and immature. Great job costing yourself millions of dollars bro.
    dude, I am from Plymouth. It is the least threatening place on earth. Why he needed to come out with an assault rifle and point it at a family I don't understand.

    I am all for giving leeway to young black americans considering the general environments many of them come from. But cmon Malik, you need to either learn from this or cost yourself a ton of money..

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •